Middle Class Blacks Do Not Need AA

I just deleted a pretty long response I was going to post. Frankly, it doesn't matter. All I really care about is if I get into a school or not, at this point, and I don't really care who my classmates are. I'm not interested in being the bad guy in this thread.

I just deleted a pretty long response I was going to post. Frankly, it doesn't matter. All I really care about is if I get into a school or not, at this point, and I don't really care who my classmates are. I'm not interested in being the bad guy in this thread.

I'm staying out of AA threads from now on.

Damn, and I was all ready to jump in with my (lower upper class) racial burden, namely that, until you've been spit on, denied service, or various other sundry indignities based on your race, it might behoove you not to presume how much prejudice money can or can't buy off in our fine nation.

Do you think this is enough to justify AA programs? If the admissions process was, indeed, behaving prejudicially against black, then AA might be justified. however, is this the case? Perhaps in the past, but does it still occur today?

Even so, a middle class black kid from NJ who went to a prep school isn't making your school more diverse.He had basically the same experience as I did... Now, the kid from inner city Newark had a VERY different experience.

With all due respect, Captain Longshot --I do take issue with the bolded statements, particularly the latter. Being black in this country IS in itself an experience. It would be incorrect of you to assume that a middle class black kid attending a prep school is (a) receiving similar benefits and opportunities in both home, school, and society as white kids from the same social class or is (b) somehow immune from facing some of the same obstacles, discrimination, and barriers to opportunity as do blacks of a lower social status.

I find it difficult to believe that the student you referenced (and the family he hails from) is simply living a "chocolate-covered" version of your life, as your second statement seems to imply. This seems to be a conception of "race" that a non-minority would likely hold. I would venture to guess that you may simply not know this student well enough, or be made privy to enough of his family's business, to genuinely know whether "he had basically the same experience [you] did." In fact, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that he may have a "VERY different experience" than *YOU*, while at the same time share a wealth of common experiences with that black kid from Newark.

The example used earlier was not perfectly worded, but was correct in spirit. A better example would have been to say that a black and a white student (from the same high school) who each have parents that earn roughly $70,000 per year are in no different position in terms of access to opportunity or potential for success. Neither of them should be given preference simply based on their race.

Sanders' article is controversial, and leaves a lot of room for criticism. But to me, the thesis is that we should look at the long-term consequences of any program quantitatively rather than just assuming that the program is successful. I'd love to see others complile their own data and reanalyze his data as a catalyst to opening up discussion based on real numbers rather than straw men created by both sides.

I am skeptical that the system can be changed at all in the near future. It's become too ingrained and in the short term would lead to a severe drop in URMs at the top schools, law firms, etc. The public owuldn't stand for this, which is why the system would need to be phased out or revised VERY gradually to make progress without hurting those who it had initially intended to help.

I am skeptical that the system can be changed at all in the near future. It's become too ingrained and in the short term would lead to a severe drop in URMs at the top schools, law firms, etc. The public owuldn't stand for this, which is why the system would need to be phased out or revised VERY gradually to make progress without hurting those who it had initially intended to help.

Ok, I'm back but only to say the following: AA, or any program like it, should exist, not as a form of repayment for misdeeds, but as a device to create opportunities where none would exist otherwise. America is a land of opportunity (or so we tell ourselves) and education is the mode through which we can all make something of ourselves.

Sadly, in many ways the K-12 education system in this country fails those who are poor. I'm not sure if that system can ever be fixed. AA is (or at least can be) a system to provide students from underprivileged backgrounds with a chance to do better than their parents, and give a better chance for their kids.

I refuse to believe that any racial group is so genetically different that they are not able to score well on standardized tests or do well in school. We're all the same damn species!

I know this isn't the argument that everyone is having here (or maybe it is), but that's my opinion on AA.

(I really wanted out of this conversation, but Paper Chaser is right, the friggin "unread replies" dealie keeps pulling you back in...)

I think it's problematic that you think there is something dublicitous about middle class blacks. Where does this opinon come from?

In any case, let me say for full disclosure that i'm working class and come from a single parent home. According to Opoto, I've done the "come up"

I don't think middle class blacks defend AA for some ulterior or covert reason. They defend it bc, despite the problematics behind it (like i personally think it's really sh*tty that a poor rural white kid can't get the same bumbs). However, it seems to me that you are saying that middle class blks shouldn't get AA and it should solely go to the poorer ones. But this begs the question--just who is applying to law school in huge amounts? If it's the middle class ones, should we just forget about them and admit the 5 poorer blks? And if it's the poorer blks that apply in larger #s, they will probably get looked at with even more attention than the middle class blacks anyway (especially if they cannot tell a compelling story).

Middle class blacks do defend AA for an ulterior reason: they (along with wealthy blacks) are the greatest beneficiaries of AA. The classic argument is that wealth buys access to better schools and greater preparation for standardized testing. Blacks who can afford this are at a competitive advantage from poorer blacks who cannot.

I think it's problematic that you think there is something dublicitous about middle class blacks. Where does this opinon come from?

In any case, let me say for full disclosure that i'm working class and come from a single parent home. According to Opoto, I've done the "come up"

I don't think middle class blacks defend AA for some ulterior or covert reason. They defend it bc, despite the problematics behind it (like i personally think it's really sh*tty that a poor rural white kid can't get the same bumbs). However, it seems to me that you are saying that middle class blks shouldn't get AA and it should solely go to the poorer ones. But this begs the question--just who is applying to law school in huge amounts? If it's the middle class ones, should we just forget about them and admit the 5 poorer blks? And if it's the poorer blks that apply in larger #s, they will probably get looked at with even more attention than the middle class blacks anyway (especially if they cannot tell a compelling story).

Just wondering what you reason for why they defend AA is, it doesn't look like you finished your thought.